Pseudoarcheology allows for people to make sense of world phenomena for themselves. While archaeology uses logical thought and methods to interpret discoveries, pseudoarcheology tends to bypass the scientific process. These claims are broadcasted by means of television shows, such as Ancient Aliens, making it assessable to a large audience. I watched a fair share when I was a child with my father. The discovery of such things always kept me interested, which is probably what started my curiosity and lead me to pursue a career within archaeology honestly. Speaking for myself, I always thought those shows were ridiculous. They never showed and real data or how they came up with their interpretation. The issue is that they are spreading these claims of pseudoarcheology to a susceptible audience, because most people do not have a background in archaeology, making them more likely to believe what the “professionals” on television are saying. The harm in believing in pseudoscientific claims is that there is no logical process used to support these claims.
As I said before, these claims come about because people want to make sense of the world around them. In most cases, people always point back to the myth of Atlantis and its inhabitants for the creation of larger monuments. The idea that ancient states were organized and powerful enough to create large monuments such as mounds and pyramids was crazy to most people. They would use Atlantis, or aliens, as a way to make the creation of these structures understandable for themselves. This thought process that ancient states couldn’t have been able to build these structures is very close minded. There is a massive amount of evidence behind the creation of the Egyptian pyramids by the Egyptians themselves. During lecture, Professor Watrall mentioned that pseudoarcheology was also used by Nazi Germany to gain support for the genocide of the Jews. I never knew that pseudoarcheology could even be used to help one’s personal agenda. I can’t believe that Hitler could shape a pseudoarcheological claim to move people in his favor. I couldn’t find any good articles on this so I’m hoping we go over it more during lecture. While learning about pseudoarcheology is interesting it is not good when people decide that it is logical. The belief in pseudoarcheology can be harmful. In some cases, such as Nazi Germany, it could turn fatal. In less extreme cases, it could lead to misinformed people.
Hello! I really liked your explanation of the differences between archaeology and pseudoarchaeology. In lecture, Dr. Watrall definitely touched on how the scientific method is ignored in pseudoarchaeology, along with rational thought processes in general. I think it is very harmful that these claims are not only expressed through Hollywood, whether it be TV or film, but the worst is that “reputable” networks continue to promote the claims. The History Channel is viewed as factual, and shows like Ancient Aliens, as you stated, are proof that these pseudoarchaeological claims are often perceived as fact. I find it very interesting that networks like the History Channel actually persuaded you to look more into a career in archaeology, but I guess it is a good thing that you can recognize how invalid the pseudoarchaeology claims really are. I also really liked and agreed with your explanation of how despite archaeology students, like you and I, are able to recognize the illegitimacy of these shows, the general public does not. In my blog post for this week I even went on to examine how these shows often use “reputable” sources to defend their claims, and how these “PhD’s” often have degrees completely unrelated to the topics that they are discussing. It is so interesting to recognize and examine just how false pseudoarchaeological claims really are, but we also need to recognize how harmful they are to our society, and find ways in which to educate the general public so that these claims do not continue to gain traction.
I fully agree that pseudoarcheology tends to make false claims and does not support said claims with scientific processes, but how dangerous is it actually. I believe things such as climate change need to be taken seriously and are in fact true but I’m not sure if someone not believing it makes it dangerous. It certainly makes people ignorant when they ignore scientific facts for their beliefs but on the other hand everyone is entitles to their own beliefs/opinions. I think the belief in pseudoarcheology itself isn’t dangerous, it just depends on what you do with that opinion. In instances with Hitler, he used those beliefs to take action in a seriously negative and evil way. also, if the whole world as a whole decides to ignore climate change and play it off as a conspiracy theory then it would become dangerous. for the most part though I think people believing aliens built the pyramids isn’t a huge deal. Again, I choose not to believe it myself but that’s just someone else’s belief. Same as how a lot of Christians believe in god and we don’t have proof he exists but as a society most of us accept that that’s a belief of some people. Just because you believe in a specific idea yourself, even if it isn’t scientifically proven, it does not automatically make it dangerous. A lot of people believe in ghost but they don’t go around swinging weapons in the dark to try to take out a ghost! More often than not people’s crazy beliefs are more annoying than anything. It all comes down to how far someone takes their beliefs and if they take action in a negative, positive or neutral way.